6th ed Tactica: Devistators

[DarkGuard]

(This makes me sounds incredibly picky but Devastator is spelt wrong in the title)

 

And spelled is spelled wrong in your post. :)

 

He's British, he's "spelt" it fine. ;)

[Iron Father Ferrum]

I almost added a post script in there about differences between our English and your English, but I figured the smiley-implied-humor would soak up any ill will.

[Bannus]

Back on topic, please.

[Deiros]

I still consider in only taking devastator squads with 4 ML, but I do now field my tactical squads with heavy bolters instead and cap objective with them, in the end he needs his infantry to take away your objective and if his TEQ are charging your tactical squad you are probably already lost or you have a really nice unit about to counter charge them.

 

Yes if you math hammer that 25% of 4 shots is 1 and 25% of 8 is 2 plus the saves and etc... in the end rolling 8 dices is more chances than sometimes 2 hits than begging for that 1 hit with a melta that will not make their assault fall short anyway. Yes the Heavy Bolter doesn't hit as hard but it makes them roll more time and chances to fail their saves, so now I field tactical squads with a meltagun/flamer and a heavy bolter all the time and it works fine sometimes I even get to shave of some hull points from a transport with them.

[reckoning]

Another thing to consider per my own tactica (as an ever efficient Ultramarine player) is that 4 heavy weapons in a single unit is seen in many cases as too much to get the job done. A better choice IMHO is three, allowing you to spend that overage on a weapon or upgrade for a different unit. The more times you can fire with different units at an opponent can be key to getting the job done quicker. It is that philosophical syndrome "How many licks does it take to get to the middle of a Tootsie Pop? One...Two...Three....CRUNCH".

 

I go with some of the other poster's above on tone. Keep Tactica all about facts, not feelings, and include data to confirm the benefits you present. Going back to my concept of 3 vs 4....it may be that in the balance, the new HP system may mean that for S7 or lower, the 4th weapon may be needed to get a meaningful impact on a vehicle, but 3 MMs or 3 LCs or 3 MLs may be just fine.

 

My favorite dev squad is just 5 marines, 1 PC and 2 MLs....bring two of those and happy hunting....I think more game experience in 6th and some good old fashioned math hammering will be needed before I change that up. For the points, lascannons and plasma cannons are cheaper in tactical squads....

 

The tactica should include those ideas. This is true that if the Devs go for anti Horde, they'll need as much heavy weapons as possible. On the other hand, if going to hunt vehicules 3 heavy is the way to go (3 LC shoots: say 2 hits, baring the occasional 1/2, only 1 would really hurt the vehicule).

 

With 3 or 4 ML, it's unlikely to remove all Hull Points in a salvo. They'll need additionnal support so 3 ML may be the better choice there. However if the Devs are using Autocanons, they'll better use 4. Finally, if the army doesn't have much AAA, a 4 heavy weapon team may help filling the need.

 

In fact, if they are going for vehicules, it's more a game of area denial... creating killing zones.

 

Our Devs can use Autocannons?

[DarkGuard]

I believe he was referring to Havocs, who can. They follow pretty much the same design principles as Devs.

[Kua]

A question about the “suicide” variant with 2 MM:

How does it work if after landing they only can snap fire (means mostly to hit nothing) and the turn after they are either already dead or everything vulnerable is out of 12"? At least that’s how I imagine it would happen.